Supreme Court of Georgia· 10/22/2018

In re Hunt

Citations

820 S.E.2d 716
304 Ga. 635

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

reciting that the Special Master had concluded that ABA Standard 9.22 (k) applied where “[b]ased on the admitted facts, a case of theft by fiduciary would not be difficult to prove”
noting that restitution was not mitigating because it had been ordered by a judge and citing ABA Standard 9.4 (a), which provides that forced or compelled restitution is neither aggravating nor mitigating
accepting special master’s recommendation and disbarring attorney who stole client funds from his trust account and converted them to his own use and the aggravating factors outweighed the mitigating factors
disbarring attorney with prior disciplinary history for violating Rules 1.15 (I), 1.15 (II), and 8.4 (a) (4), related to attorney’s misuse of funds he was entrusted 8 with as part of his representation of a client and her two sons
“[T]his Court relies on the [ABA Standards] for general guidance in determining the appropriate level of discipline.”
repayment not considered mitigating factor where attorney replaced the funds he took only after his conversion of the funds was discovered and he had been ordered to appear before judge on the matter

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.